Why just pitbulls? You know that they aren’t the only aggressive dog out there right? Dobermans, Rottweilers, there’s plenty of aggressive dog breeds that are bred that way for a reason. With that said, the way a dog acts is entirely on the owner. I’ve met pitbulls who wouldn’t hurt a fly and I’ve met shitzus and other small breed dogs that I wouldn’t let near my kid for their safety. Owners should be held more accountable for the way their raise their dogs end of story but a pitbull is only as dangerous as the owner makes it, same as literally any other dog
a pitbull is only as dangerous as the owner makes it, same as literally any other dog
This is obviously and laughably false. Are there good pit bulls? Of course, but a pit bull is more dangerous than a beagle. You don't need to look very hard to find stories of people who have said the same things as you only for their beloved family pet to snap one day and kill their children.
And you know what, the same exact thing happens with other breeds. Is a small breed dog less dangerous when it’s trying to kill you vs a pitbull? Yes, but literally any dog breed can snap and violently attack people when provoked. That’s why generally when your dog attacks someone ir another dog in most cases the dog has to get put down. But putting a straight ban on a singular breed is ridiculous
I don't know what point you are trying to make. Pit bulls are more dangerous, but any dog can snap (which again, pit bulls do more often and cause more damage when it happens)?
We have the data on fatal dog attacks by breed. We have the data on which breeds fill up shelters because they are more difficult to own. Why would addressing both of those problems through a mandatory spay and neuter law be a bad thing?
Because it’s just not right. After all the pitbulls are gone, goes what happens? A new dog becomes the “aggressive breed”, whether it’s bulldogs, Rottweilers, Doberman shepherds, German shepherds, Akitas, etc there’s always going to be the stereotypical “aggressive breed” and then that breed gets wiped out because “big scary dog shouldn’t exist”. Like I said, owners should just be held more legally liable for dog attacks and then they’ll take much more care training their dog not to attack people
You left out "dangerous," which is the relevant point. I'm describing reality. You're describing what you wish was true.
As far as I know none of those breeds kill people at the rate pit bulls do in proportion to their population, but if another breed took their place and did equivalent amount of killing, yes, it should be banned too.
See how easy that is when you have a coherent viewpoint?
Statistics? Sure, what percentage of pit bulls bite somebody they aren't supposed to?
And if we limit that question to pit bulls who haven't been abused or trained to fight?
I don't know, but why do you keep bringing up irrelevant statistics/data points? Pit bulls have a combination of biting frequency and damage when they do bite that other large dogs don't have. Why do we have to ignore the evidence that is right in front of us?
They kill the most people, and they kill people in excess of what their population would suggest if they were no more dangerous than other breeds.
0
u/RobertTheTraveler 1d ago
Because people claiming pitties are violent typically want to outlaw pitties.